United States v. Kelly
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9225
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- Kelly was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and sentenced to 115 months with 36 months of supervised release.
- Special condition fifteen prohibited possession of any material containing nudity or depicting sexual activity; it was later found overbroad and remanded for re-sentencing.
- On remand, the district court amended the condition to ban materials containing child pornography or depictions of nude children.
- The court supported the amendment with individualized findings that Kelly is a sexual predator predisposed to exploiting children and that viewing such material would impede rehabilitation.
- Kelly has a history including first-degree sexual assault of a child; the district court tied the condition to rehabilitation and public protection.
- The issue on appeal is whether the amended condition is unconstitutionally overbroad under the First Amendment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the amended condition overbroad under the First Amendment? | Kelly argues the condition bans legal material and is overbroad. | The government contends individualized findings justify the restriction as narrowly tailored for rehabilitation and public safety. | No; the condition is sufficiently narrowed and supported by individualized findings. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wiedower, 634 F.3d 490 (8th Cir. 2011) (upholding bans on pornography in supervised release)
- United States v. Thompson, 653 F.3d 688 (8th Cir. 2011) (overbreadth review for conditions on supervised release)
- United States v. Mayo, 642 F.3d 628 (8th Cir. 2011) (district courts must follow statutory mandates with individualized findings)
- United States v. Forde, 664 F.3d 1219 (8th Cir. 2012) (reaffirmed standards for individualized inquiry in supervised release)
- United States v. Simons, 614 F.3d 475 (8th Cir. 2010) (broad restrictions on nudity can be overbroad)
- United States v. Kelly, 625 F.3d 516 (8th Cir. 2010) (vacated overbroad condition banning nudity; requirement of individualized findings)
- United States v. Kreitinger, 576 F.3d 500 (8th Cir. 2009) (district court discretion limited to rehabilitative considerations)
- Osborne v. Ohio, 495 U.S. 103 (U.S. 1990) (First Amendment rights of individuals, including offenders)